Today, the Supreme Court of the U.S. used its emergency docket to revive a Trump Administration Clean Water Act rule that sidelined states, Tribes, and the public in permitting decisions for large projects affecting water.<\/p>\n
SCOTUS provided no reasoning for its decision or its use of the emergency docket, normally reserved for special circumstances. Justice Kagan led a dissent<\/a> from four justices including Chief Justice Roberts.<\/p>\n \u201cToday the Supreme Court\u2019s ultra-conservative majority used the emergency docket to both revive an environmentally harmful rule and severally limit the authority of lower courts, without writing a single word as to why either was appropriate,\u201d said Andrew Hawley, attorney at the Western Environmental Law Center. \u201cMoreover, the irony of today\u2019s decision is that the court effectively admonished the lower court for setting aside a clearly unlawful rule on too little process, while acting with arguably less process and ignoring its own rules along the way.\u201d<\/p>\n “The reinstatement\u00a0of these rules will limit the ability of states to protect rivers from the harmful impact of hydropower dams on rivers and those who use them for recreation,” said Robert Nasdor, American Whitewater legal director. “These rules needlessly limit states from requiring that these projects meet state water quality standards under the Clean Water Act.”<\/p>\n \u201cWith today\u2019s decision, corporate interests have been elevated above the rights of states and Indigenous Tribes, said Nic Nelson, executive director of Idaho Rivers United. \u201cThis once again clouds the public process for review and engagement.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe ruling today will directly result in the degradation of California\u2019s rivers and streams and will further imperil federally and state protected salmon and steelhead,\u201d said Redgie Collins, California Trout\u2019s legal and policy director. \u201cThe majority of the Supreme Court has shown a disregard for precedent in this hypocritical decision that turns its back on the rights of states to choose how and when to protect their rivers.\u201d<\/p>\n Background:<\/strong><\/p>\n For nearly 50 years, decisions regarding large federally regulated projects such as pipelines, dams, industrial plants, municipal facilities, and wetland development have required state, Tribal, and federal cooperation under the Clean Water Act. The Trump administration gutted that part of the law (final 401 rule here<\/a>), allowing the federal government to force such projects onto states and Tribes despite pollution risks to rivers, streams, lakes, and wetlands within their borders. The changes to the Clean Water Act\u2019s Section 401 represent a major threat to clean water and public health from coast to coast and everywhere in between.<\/p>\n The rule also suppresses state and Tribal public participation processes that moor U.S. water policy in the harbor of democracy. Further, the new rule limits the information on proposed projects that may be made available to the states, Tribes, and the public.<\/p>\n The new rule, directly overturns Congress\u2019 intent to integrate state and federal authority for permitting decisions affecting state waterways.<\/p>\n As the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality\u00a0noted earlier this year, the Trump 401 rule “caused considerable implementation confusion” and “brought about the breakdown of a long-standing, formally established and cooperative process between” federal and state agencies trying to coordinate\u00a0the review\u00a0of federal permits and licenses under section 401 of the Clean Water Act. These problems were predictable, and the\u00a0direct result of the\u00a0many problems with the\u00a0Trump\u00a0rule. For example, according\u00a0to TCEQ’s 2019 comments on the proposed rule, the “narrowed scope of certification review” in the Trump\u00a0rule “conflicts with Texas state law and several of TCEQ’s rules [and] limit[ed] Texas’ authority” under section 401.<\/p>\n Contacts<\/strong>:<\/p>\n Andrew Hawley, Western Environmental Law Center, 206-487-7250, hawley@westernlaw.org<\/a><\/p>\n Amy Kober, American Rivers, 503-708-1145,\u00a0akober@americanrivers.org<\/a><\/p>\n Bob Nasdor, American Whitewater, 617-584-4566, bob@americanwhitewater.org<\/a><\/p>\n Nic Nelson, Idaho Rivers United, 208-343-7481, nic@idahorivers.org<\/a><\/p>\n Walter \u201cRedgie\u201d Collins, California Trout, 415-748-8755, rcollins@caltrout.org<\/a><\/p>\n Photos for media use available here<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n Letters (public comments) from states, Tribes, and organizations opposing Section 401 rollbacks:<\/strong><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: State of South Dakota (scathing)<\/strong><\/p>\n October 21, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/pdfhost.io\/v\/v.mLY3z2d_20191021South_Dakota_CWA_401_commentspdf.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: State of Arkansas<\/strong><\/p>\n October 21, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/pdfhost.io\/v\/5RTbsrt8~_AR_401_Commentspdf.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: State of California<\/strong><\/p>\n October 21, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/pdfhost.io\/v\/F1zojtGKa_20191021_Ltr_to_A_Wheeler_re_SWRCB_response_to_401_Cert_Proposed_Rulepdf.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation<\/strong><\/p>\n October 21, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/pdfhost.io\/v\/FoaQ2zvAh_20191021Yakama_Nation_Section_401_Commentspdf.pdf<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: Inter Tribal Association of Arizona<\/strong><\/p>\n October 21, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/pdfhost.io\/v\/.jk5nJ1oK_InterTribal_Assn_of_AZ_401_Commentspdf.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: State of Idaho<\/strong><\/p>\n October 21, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/pdfhost.io\/v\/kZlX31CB7_ID_401_Commentspdf.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: State of Louisiana<\/strong><\/p>\n October 19, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/pdfhost.io\/v\/F52ivsrg._LA_401_Commentspdf.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin<\/strong><\/p>\n October 22, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/pdfhost.io\/v\/UTuKpy6FF_Menominee_Tribe_401_Commentspdf.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: State of Montana<\/strong><\/p>\n October 17, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/pdfhost.io\/v\/SnoPVhxYj_MT_401_rule_Commentspdf.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: State of Nevada<\/strong><\/p>\n October 17, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/pdfhost.io\/v\/0BeC6MkzI_NV_401_Rule_Commentspdf.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: State of New York<\/strong><\/p>\n October 21, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/pdfhost.io\/v\/c0.jrsYs~_NY_401_Commentspdf.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: State of Pennsylvania<\/strong><\/p>\n October 21, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/pdfhost.io\/v\/Q9h7qFprp_PA_Comments_on_401_rulepdf.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: Seattle City Light<\/strong><\/p>\n October 21, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/pdfhost.io\/v\/XDTlaYaTh_Seattle_City_Light_401_Commentspdf.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: Skokomish Indian Tribe<\/strong><\/p>\n October 20, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/pdfhost.io\/v\/NKCE.ps4l_20191020Skokomish_Tribe_Section_401_Commentspdf.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: Standing Rock Sioux<\/strong><\/p>\n October 21, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/pdfhost.io\/v\/67Ar2EyV8_Standing_Rock_Sioux_401_Commentspdf.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: State of Tennessee<\/strong><\/p>\n October 21, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/pdfhost.io\/v\/e7PdQltny_TN_401_Commentspdf.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: State of Texas<\/strong><\/p>\n October, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/pdfhost.io\/v\/SS5mPC48m_TX_401_commentspdf.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians<\/strong><\/p>\n October 14, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/pdfhost.io\/v\/hiNTrBCKr_Twenty_Nine_Palms_Band_401_Commentspdf.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: State of Washington<\/strong><\/p>\n May 24, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/pdfhost.io\/v\/21GYgD4xa_WA_401_Commentspdf.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: National Governors\u2019 Association<\/strong><\/p>\n October 18, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/www.nga.org\/policy-communications\/letters-nga\/natural-resources-committee\/letter-regarding-the-environmental-protection-agencys-proposed-rule-updating-regulations-on-water-quality-certification\/<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: Western Governors\u2019 Association, National Conference of State Legislatures, National Association of Counties, National League of Cities, U.S. Conference of Mayors, Council of State Governments, Western Interstate Region, Association of Clean Water Administrators, Association of State Floodplain Managers, Association of State Wetland Managers, Western States Water Council<\/strong><\/p>\n October 16, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/www.ncsl.org\/Portals\/1\/Documents\/standcomm\/scnri\/EPA_NPRM_CWA_401_Comments_FINAL.pdf?ver=2019-10-17-150909-880×tamp=1571346568787<\/a><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: Earthjustice, Sierra Club, and 31 other organizations<\/strong><\/p>\n October 21, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/www.sierraclub.org\/sites\/www.sierraclub.org\/files\/uploads-wysiwig\/Sierra%20Club%20Comments%20Section%20401%20EPA%20Proposed%20Rule%20final.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: Sens. Carper, Duckworth, and Booker<\/strong><\/p>\n October 21, 2019<\/p>\n https:\/\/www.epw.senate.gov\/public\/index.cfm\/2019\/10\/carper-duckworth-and-booker-epa-s-section-401-proposal-violates-states-rights-harms-water-quality<\/a><\/p>\n Opposition Letter: Southern Environmental Law Center<\/strong><\/p>\n October 21, 2019<\/p>\n